Dataset Information

Taxonomic reassessment of Rhodnius zeledoni Jurberg, Rocha & Galvao: a morphological and morphometric analysis comparing its taxonomic relationship with Rhodnius domesticus Neiva & Pinto.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Rhodnius zeledoni was described from a single specimen. Since its description, doubts have arisen regarding the taxonomic status of this species in relation to Rhodnius domesticus.

Methods

The present study reviewed and compared R. zeledoni with R. domesticus based on morphological analysis and head geometric morphometrics.

Results

Our analysis revealed the absence of distinctive diagnostic characters between the two species at specific levels. Rhodnius zeledoni and R. domesticus show morphological and morphometric similarity, with only minor differences in coloration observed between them. Contrary to previous statements, our analysis showed that R. zeledoni and R. paraensis are not closely related species, not corroborating previous studies with such an assumption.

Conclusions

Therefore, we formally propose R. zeledoni as a junior synonym of R. domesticus.

SUBMITTER: Oliveira-Correia JPS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10956182 | biostudies-literature | 2024 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Taxonomic reassessment of Rhodnius zeledoni Jurberg, Rocha & Galvão: a morphological and morphometric analysis comparing its taxonomic relationship with Rhodnius domesticus Neiva & Pinto.

Oliveira-Correia João Paulo Sales JPS de Oliveira Jader J Gil-Santana Hélcio Reinaldo HR da Silva Rocha Dayse D Galvão Cleber C

BMC zoology 20240321 1

<h4>Background</h4>Rhodnius zeledoni was described from a single specimen. Since its description, doubts have arisen regarding the taxonomic status of this species in relation to Rhodnius domesticus.<h4>Methods</h4>The present study reviewed and compared R. zeledoni with R. domesticus based on morphological analysis and head geometric morphometrics.<h4>Results</h4>Our analysis revealed the absence of distinctive diagnostic characters between the two species at specific levels. Rhodnius zeledoni ...[more]

PMID: 38515212

Similar Datasets

Project description:With the decline of bee populations worldwide, studies determining current wild bee distributions and diversity are increasingly important. Wild bee identification is often completed by experienced taxonomists or by genetic analysis. The current study was designed to compare two methods of identification including: (1) morphological identification by experienced taxonomists using images of field-collected wild bees and (2) genetic analysis of composite bee legs (multiple taxa) using metabarcoding. Bees were collected from conservation grasslands in eastern Iowa in summer 2019 and identified to the lowest taxonomic unit using both methods. Sanger sequencing of individual wild bee legs was used as a positive control for metabarcoding. Morphological identification of bees using images resulted in 36 unique taxa among 22 genera, and >80% of Bombus specimens were identified to species. Metabarcoding was limited to genus-level assignments among 18 genera but resolved some morphologically similar genera. Metabarcoding did not consistently detect all genera in the composite samples, including kleptoparasitic bees. Sanger sequencing showed similar presence or absence detection results as metabarcoding but provided species-level identifications for cryptic species (i.e., Lasioglossum). Genus-specific detections were more frequent with morphological identification than metabarcoding, but certain genera such as Ceratina and Halictus were identified equally well with metabarcoding and morphology. Genera with proportionately less tissue in a composite sample were less likely to be detected using metabarcoding. Image-based methods were limited by image quality and visible morphological features, while genetic methods were limited by databases, primers, and amplification at target loci. This study shows how an image-based identification method compares with genetic techniques, and how in combination, the methods provide valuable genus- and species-level information for wild bees while preserving tissue for other analyses. These methods could be improved and transferred to a field setting to advance our understanding of wild bee distributions and to expedite conservation research.